### State ofUtah

GARY R. HERBERT Governor

GREG BELL LieutenantGovernor

September 21, 20I0 

### Department of Environmental Quality

Amanda Smith Executive Director

DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY Cheryl Heying

Director

Callie A. Videtich, Director Air and Radiation Program US EPA Region 8 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1129

DearMs. Videtich:

Re: Section 110 Plan to Support the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS DAQP-020-l0

Section 110(a)(1) ofthe Clean AirAct (CAA) requires that, within 3 years following the promulgation ofa National Ambient AirQuality Standard (NAAQS), each state will submit a plan providing for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement ofsuch standard. The NAAQS for PM2.5 were signed on September 21,2006. Hence, these Section 110 plans were due to EPA by September of2009.

The most recentguidance1 indicates that, in many cases, the section 110 plans to address the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS may already be adequate to implement the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS because many ofthe required section 11O(a)(1) and 11O(a)(2) elements relate to the general information and authorities thatconstitutethe "infrastructure" ofa state's air quality management program, and these elementshave been in placeto address particulate matter since the initial State Implementation Plans (SIPs) were submitted in responseto the 1970 Clean Air Act.

To that end, some background concerningthe Section 110 SIP and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS may be helpful.

In addressing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, wherein PM2.5 was first introduced as the indicator offine particulate matter, Utah indicated, by letter ofMarch 27, 1998,that it had reviewed its 110 SIP and believed that no revisions would be necessary to implement the revised particulate matter standards. Such assessment was consistent with what EPA had anticipated in its initial guidance, dated December 23, 1997.

1Guidance on SIPElements Required Under Sections llO(a)(l) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM25) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); From William T. Harnett, Director Air Quality Policy Division, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, To Regional Air Division Directors, Regions I-X; Dated September 25,2009 195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT Mailing Address: P.O. Box 144820 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820 Telephone (801) 536-4000 • Fax (801)536-4099 • T.D.D. (801) 536-4414 www.deq.utah.gov Printed on 100% recycled paper

### DAQP-020-10 Page2

However, additional guidance (dated August 15, 2006 and October 2, 2007) identified several issues that would require special consideration. These were the interstate transport issues to be addressed under 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and the emergency episode provisions ofsection 110(a)(2)(G). EPA indicated that, with respectto the latter, it intended to initiate rulemaking in order to provide the necessary numerical limits and concentration levels for emergency episode action plans involving PM2.5.

In a letter dated December 3, 2007, Utah reiterated that all the elements identified in the October2, 2007, guidance were addressed in its current SIP and were adequate to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (as well as the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS). Utah also indicated that it would take appropriate actionto amend its emergency episode plan as soon as the EPArevised 40 CFR section 51.150 to establish priority classifications and establish a significant harm level for PM2.5.

Via e-mail ofMarch 3, 2008, EPA provided clarification concerningthe information it would need in order to complete its review ofthe section 110 SIPs. The e-mail referenced EPA's earlier guidance ofAugust 15, 2006, and October 2, 2007, and indicated that a certification ofSIP adequacy may be submitted where appropriate. Theemail requested that such state certification include a completed PM2.5 criteriatable, a draft ofwhich was attached. Additionally, it reiterated the following with respectto certain ofthe Section 110 requirements:

• It noted that, in addressing section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i), states were not required to submit PSD and Nonattainment NSRprogram SIPs for PM2.5 until EPA had completed a revision ofthe federal regulations covering these programs, and

• Until EPA revised the Emergency Episode Plan and significantharm levels for PM2.5, it recommended that states rely on interim guidance to satisfY the Section 110 (a)(2)(G) requirements.

In response to the e-mail, Utah sent another letter dated April 17, 2008. Attached to the letterwas a completed PM2.5 criteria table which provided a more detailed assessment ofhow Utah's SIP addressed each ofthe elements identified in section 110(a)(2).

EPA did publish a finding in the federal register (see FRVol. 73, pp. 62902) that Utah's submittal was complete with respect to Section 11O(a)(2.) However, the issue ofapproval was not addressed, and itis therefore somewhat more difficultto point to the adequacy ofthis SIP with respectto the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as an indication ofits suitability to supportthe revised NAAQS of2006.
Nevertheless, as we evaluate each ofthe program elements described in CAA Section 110(a)(2), we are left to assume thatthe SIP Utah has in place is indeed adequate to support the 1997NAAQS for particulate matter. Furthermore, and in keeping with EPA's mostrecent guidance, we will conclude that it is also adequate to administer the PM2.5 NAAQS as revised in 2006.
Generally speaking, this evaluation ofthe Section 110 elements is again provided in the (attached) PM2.5 criteriatable. However, since some ofthese elements have been given special attention in the most recent guidance from EPA, some additional discussion will be provided herein:

• Section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibiting emissions activity within Utah from contributing significantly to NAAQS nonattainment in any other State

There are actually two clauses to this element; one relating to impact on areas not attaining the NAAQS and the other addressing interference with effortsto maintain compliancewith the•,'



### DAQP-020-10 

### Page 3

NAAQS in down-wind states. EPA is interpreting this second clause to include areas that are meeting the 2006 standard, not merely areas formerly designated nonattainment that would be subject to a maintenance plan. The guidance suggests that states should explain whetherornot emissions from the state "have this impact."

Absent a pre-defined maintenance area with a SIP that quantifies howmuch impact is acceptable with regard toNAAQS protection, it is not entirely clearhow "this impact" differs from eithera NAAQS violation (first clause) orthe prevention ofsignificant deterioration (see below.) Thus, for the purpose ofthis exercise, Utah will look atthe whole ofSection 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)to mean that emissions from Utah are neither causing nor contributing in a significant way to NAAQS violations in other states.
Any such assessment to thatend would need tobe supported by an adequate technical analysis. This much was anticipated in the guidance, which howeverwas written at a time when the CAIR rule was still in a state oflitigation and uncertainty.
Recalling that, with respecttothe 1997 PM2.5 standard, the CAIRrule had itselfrelied upon such

a technical analysis toconcludethat certain western states did not significantly cause orcontribute to any NAAQS violations in down-wind states, thesewestern states were encouraged to cite the CAIR analysis as evidence that it was not necessary at that time toexercise the authority described in Section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i.) Utah took this approach in a transport SIP for both PM2.5 and 8-hour

ozone. The SIP was submitted to EPA on March 28, 2007, and EPA proposed approval with an effective date ofMay 27, 2008 (see FR73, No. 61, pp 16543).

The CAIR analysis, however, did not address the 2006 standard for PM2.5. So, as in interim policy, this mostrecent guidancerecommends that each ofthe states conduct its ownregional analysis todetermine as much for their 110 SIP submittals.

On August 2, 20I0, EPA proposed a new rule toreplace the CAIR as a means to address interstate transport (see FR 75 No. 147, pp 45210). Again, there are certain western states that were found not to contribute in a significant wayto any NAAQS violation, for either PM2.5 or ozone, in the down-wind states. Utah is among those states. EPA's assessmentregarding these western states is undoubtedly based on a regional scale technical analysis, and Utah will point to that analysis in order to concludethatthere are no current orfuture emissions from within its boundaries that either cause orcontribute in a significant way to NAAQS violations in any ofthe down-wind states.

• Section 11O(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)- prohibiting emissions activity within Utah from interferingwith the efforts ofany other State to Prevent SignificantDeterioration ofits airquality orprotect its visibility
Again with this paragraph, there aretwo clauses which must be considered: PSD and visibility.
Concerning PSD

- EPA believes this requirement is satisfied for PM2.5 ifa state's SIP includes preconstruction review programs for major sources that satisfy the requirements ofboth NonattainmentNSR and PSD (40 CFR 51.165(b)( 1) and 51.166 respectively). All states are currentlyrequired to have some form ofpreconstruction permittingprogram for PM2.5, and as per the guidance, it is not necessary tomake any rule revisions specifically for the purpose ofSection 110 unless the area has outstanding program deficiencies.

### DAQP-020-10 

### Page4

Utah is currently operatingunderthe PM10 surrogate policy for the PSD program, as outlined in the 1997 EPA memorandum entitled "Interim Implementation ofNew Source Review Requirements for PM2.5." Utah intends to incorporate PM2.5 into the PSD program by May 2011,

as required by the May 16, 2008, PM2.5 Implementation Rule for PM2.5 NSR. We anticipate that EPA will have established certain requirements, such as PM2.5 increments and Significant Impact Levels, and stack testing requirements that need to be in place before PM2.5 can be adequately addressed in the PSD program. Utah is currently operating under the provisions ofAppendix S for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Concerningvisibility

- According to the guidance, EPA believes this requirementcan be satisfied by an approved SIP addressingreasonably attributable visibility impairment (RAVI), ifrequired, and an approved SIP addressing regional haze.

EPA is not aware ofany certification by a Federal Land Manager ofexisting RAVI thatremains unaddressed by a currently approved SIP orFIP. Accordingly, any state for which EPA has approved into its current SIP some or all RAVI elements may satisfy this element with a verification that no source within its boundaries emits pollutants that interfere with RAVI measures included in the applicable implementation plan ofany other state.

Utah's SIP does in fact address RAVI, and a statement verifying thatthere are no Utah sources of emissions that interfere with implementation ofRA VI SIPs in other states appears within SIP SectionXXIII (Interstate Transport) and was approved by EPA on March 28, 2008.

SIP Section XXIII also addresses regional haze with the following statement: "Because Utah submitted its first Regional Haze SIP to EPA in December 2003 under 40 CFR51.309, Utah has already demonstrated reasonable progress in reducing impacts on Class I areas on the Colorado Plateau. The [forthcoming] 2007 SIP update will analyze any impacts from Utah that extend beyond the Colorado Plateau and determine appropriate long-term strategies for control measures."

Utah submitted this forthcoming regional haze SIP to EPA on September9, 2008. It includes several things that are pertinentto particulate matter, including an enhanced smoke management program as well as an Assessment ofNeed for (NOx and) PM milestones. This evaluation was based on an assessment ofstationary source emissions ofNOX and PM made bythe WRAP Market Trading Forum for all WRAP states, including the transport region states. The 2008 SIP also addresses the BestAvailable Retrofit Technology requirement for PM.

The September 25, 2009, guidance notes that, States intending to rely on a required regional haze SIP to satisfy this elementofthe Section 110 SIP, which had not formally indicated as much in a SIP submission orhave not submitted a haze SIP, may receive an additional finding offailure to submitonthis count. Furthermore, it indicates that EPA will be able to fully approve the Section 110 submittal as satisfying Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) only after ithas taken final action approving the regional haze SIP.

Utah did submit its haze SIP and did announce its intention to rely on that SIP to satisfythe Section 110 element. We would therefore, atthis point, reiterate this intention as well as point out the following: a) Utah has an approved transport SIP for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, b) the 2006 revision tothe PM NAAQS only serves to make emissions ofPM2.5 more restrictive. It follows that Utah's ability to rectify visibility impairment in a down-wind State would not, thereby, be compromised, and c) thetechnical assessments made in Utah'sregional haze SIP still reflect the'•

DAQP-020-10 

### Page 5

fact that PM emissions from stationary sources have a small impact on visibility compared to S02 emissions and smoke from fire.

• Section 11O(a)(2)(G)- providing authority to address activities causing imminent and substantial endangermentto public health, including contingency plansto implement emergency episode provisions

As discussed above, Utah had previously indicated that it would amend its emergency episode plan

as soon as EPA revised its own rules to establish priority classifications and a significant harm level for PM2.5. To date, the EPA has still not revised its rules, but the September 25, 2009, guidance includes (as attachment B) a table ofthe Recommended Interim SignificantHarm Level, Priority Levels, and Action Levels for PM2.5 Emergency Episode Plans. The guidance recommends that States set the priority levels and emergency action levels for PM2.5 necessary to develop emergency episode plans, and thatthey considerthe levels (including a significant harm level) identified in Attachment B. Using these recommended levels, States would develop emergency episode plans for any areathat has monitored and recorded 24-hourPM2.5 levels greaterthan 140.4 g/m3 since 2006. Ifthis level was never exceeded in any area ofthe State, it could certifythat it has the authority to address such episodes but that no specific plans are necessary at this time. It also assertsthat the levels identified in Attachment B are suitable for both the 1997 and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Monitoring data in Utah demonstrates that the 140.4 g/m3 has never been exceeded; therefore, our certification herein that we have the authority to address such episodes, should they occur, should meet EPA's requirement for Section 110(a)(2)(G.)

Should you need any further information in this regard, please contact Bill Reiss ofmy staffat (801) 536- 4077.
Sincerely,



## .



# V\.r.,,,

# ~~ M, Cheryl Heying,

# dJ,.,~, 

# u

MCHIBR/cy

AttachmentSIP SUBMITTAL COMPLETENESS CRITERIA CHECKLIST

SIP Submitted by: Date Submitted: Subject: Confirmation of 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) PM2

.5 NAAQS Requirements in the SIP

11 O(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements Checklist
Section llO(a) element Summary ofelement How Addressed in State SIP Where codified/approved by EPA §110(a)(2)(A) 

### include enforceable emission SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.l.a, Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### limitations andother control measures, allows adoption of Standards and limits for approved this SIP originally in the


### means, ortechniques (including attainment and maintainence ofnational early 1980's and most recently on June 

### economic incentives such asfees, Standards. (19-2-104 and 109, Utah Code 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### marketablepermits, andauctions of Annotated 1953 (UCA) ) 

### emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetablesfor compliance as may be necessary orappropriate to meet the applicable requirements of thisAct. §110(a)(2)(B) 

### provide for establishmentand SIP Section IV 

### (AmbientAirMonitoring Codified at R307-ll0-5/EPA 

### operation of appropriate devices, Program) provides a briefdescription ofthe approved this SIP originally in the 

### methods, systems, andprocedures purposes ofthe air monitoring program. early 1980's and most recently on June 

### necessary to monitor, compile, and 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### analyze data on ambient airquality, and upon request, make such data available to theAdministrator;

Page 1of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-l\Temp\XPgrpwise\R8 110 Criteria Table for PM25.doc§110(a)(2)(C) include aprogram toprovidefor the -SIP Section I (Legal Authority).A.l.b, Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA enforcement of the measures described allows for enforcement of applicable laws, approved this SIP originally in the in subparagraph (A) and regulation of regulations and standards and seek early 1980's and most recently on June the**mod~fication** andconstruction of injunctive relief. (Sections 19-2-104 and 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. any stationary source within the areas 19-2-115, UCA) coveredby theplan as necessary to
assure that national ambient air -SIP Section I (LegalAuthority).A.l.d, quality standards are achieved, provides authority to prevent construction, including apermitprogram as modification or operation ofany stationary required inparts C andD; source at any location where emissions from such source wi II prevent the attainment or maintenance of a national standard orinterfere with prevention of significant deterioration requirements. (Authority Utah Code Section 19-2-108) §110(a)(2)(D) contain adequateprovisions- SIP Section XXIII (Interstate Transport) Codified at R307-110-36/ This SIP (i)prohibiting, consistentwith the This SIP was written to satisfy the was submitted to EPA on March 28, provisions of this title, any source or requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of 2007, and EPA proposed the approve other type ofemissions activity within the clean air act for the new NAAQS for ofthis submittal on March 28, 2008 at the statefrom emitting any air PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone were promulgated 73 FR 16543, which will go into pollutant in amounts which will-- in 1997. effect on May 27, 2008. ( /) contribute significantly to nonattainment in, orinterfere with maintenance by, any otherstate with respect to any such nationalprimary

orsecondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere with measures required to be included in the applicable implementationplanfor any otherState underpart C toprevent significant deterioration of airquality

ortoprotect visibility,

Page 2 of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\XPgrpwise\R8 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc

### (ii) insuring compliance with the applicable requirements of sections 126and 115 (relating to interstate and internationalpollution abatement); §110(a)(2)(E)(i) 

### provide SIP Section V 

### (Resources) provides the Codified at R307-ll0-6/ EPA 

### (i) necessary assurances that the Division ofAir Quality commits to program approved this SIP originally in the I 

### state (or, except where the activities in relation to resources provided early 1980's and most recently on June 

### Administratordeems inappropriate, by the annual State/EPA Agreement and 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### the generalpurpose local government 105 grant applications. The State/EPA



### orgovernments, ora regional agency Agreement and 105 grant applications. I 

### designated by the state orgeneral I I 

### purpose local governmentsfor such purpose) will have adequatepersonnel, funding, andauthority understate (and, as appropriate, local) law to carry out such implementationplan (and is notprohibitedbyanyprovision of

federal orstate lawfrom carrying outsuch implementationplan or portion thereof); §110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

### (ii) requirements that the state comply SIP Section I 

### (LegalAutlwrity).A.I.g., Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### with the requirements respecting state recognizes the requirement that the State approved this SIP originally in the 

### boards undersection 128, and comply with provisions ofthe Clean Air early 1980's and most recently on June Act (Section 128) respecting State Boards. 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. (Sections 19-2-104 UCA )

Page 3 of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\XPgrpwise\RS 110 Criteria Table for PM25.doc§110(a)(2)(E)(iii) 

### (iii) necessaryassurances that, where Section 41-6a-1642 provides the counties Codified at R307-110-31/EPA 

### the state has reliedon a local or the authority to run their own emissions approved this SIP section on 

### regional government, agency, or inspection and maintenance program, and November 2, 2005 at 70 FR 66264. 

### instrumentalityfor the implementation Subsection 41-6a-1642 (2) (b)(i) requires Codified at R307-32/ EPA approved 

### of anyplanprovision, the state has the counties emissions inspection and this SIP section on July 17, 1997 at 62 

### responsibilityfor ensuring adequate maintenance program to be made to attain FR 38213. 

### implementation of suchplanprovision; ormaintain ambient air quality standards in Codified at R307-33/ EPA approved the county, consistent with the state this SIP section on August 1, 2005 at implementation plan and federal 70 FR 44055. requirements. Section X ofthe SIP outlines Codified at R307-34/ EPA approved the specific requirements ofthe automotive this SIP section on November 2, 2005 inspection and maintenance program. at 70 FR 66264. Codified at R307-35/ EPA approved this SIP section on September 14, 2005 at 70 FR 54267.


### §110(a)(2)(F) 

### require, as may beprescribedby the -SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.l.f., -Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### Administrator- requires owners oroperators of stationary approved this SIP originally in the (i) 

### the installation, maintenance, and sources to install, maintain and use early 1980's and most recently on June 

### replacement of equipment, andthe emission monitoring devices; and to make 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### implementation of othernecessary periodic reports to the StateDepartment of 

### steps by owners oroperators of Environmental Quality on the nature and 

### stationary sources to monitor amounts ofemissions from such sources. 

### emissionsfrom such sources, The State Department efEnvironmental

(ii)

### periodic reports on the nature Quality will make such data available to the 

### andamounts of emissions and public as reported and as correlated with 

### emissions-relateddatafrom such any applicable emission standards or 

### sources, and limitations. (Sections 19-2-104, UCA)

(iii) 

### correlation of such reports by the state agency with any emission -SIP Section Ill 

### (Source Surveillance)

- Cadified at R307-110-4/ EPA 

### limitations orstandards established includes inventory requirements, stack approved this SIP originally in the 

### pursuant to thisAct, which reports testing, andplant inspections {Sections 19- early 1980's and most recently on June 

### shall be available at reasonable times 2-107 and 19-2-108, UCA, allow inspection 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744.

Page 4 of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-I\Temp\XPgrpwise\R8 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc•' 

### forpublic inspection; of air pollution sources) §110(a)(2)(G) 

### providefor authority comparable to SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.1.c, -Codified at R307-110-2/EPA 

### that in section 303 andadequate provides authority to abate pollutant approved this SIP originally in the 

### contingencyplans to implement such emissions on an emergency basis to early 1980's and most recently on June 

### authority; prevent substantial endangerment to the 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. health ofpersons. (Section 19-2-112, UCA)

More details at can be found in SIP -Codified at R307-110-8/ EPA Section VII 

### (Prevention of AirPollution approved this SIP originally in the 

### Emergency Episodes) (Section 19-2-112, early 1980's and most recently on June UCA). A February 12, 2007 OAQPS Issue 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. Paper indicated that EPA will be issuing a significant harm level rule for PM2.5. Utah will address the requirements of 110 (a)(2)(G) after EPA promulgates this rule. §110(a)(2)(H) 

### providefor revision of suchplan- SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.l.a., Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### (i)from time to time as may be provides the ability for UDAQ to revises its approved this SIP originally in the 

### necessary to take account of plans to take account ofrevisions of early 1980's and most recently on June 

### revisions of such nationalprimary or national ambient air quality standard and to 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### secondary ambient airquality adopt expeditious methods ofattaining and 

### standardorthe availability of maintaining such standard. 

### improvedormore expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and

(ii) except asprovided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator finds on the basis of information available to the Administratorthat theplan is substantially inadequate to attain the nationalambient airquality standardwhich it implements, orto otherwise comply with any additional requirements established

Page 5 of9,**C:\DOCUME~l\COURTN-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\XPgrpwise\RS** 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc

# ..
underthisAct; §110(a)(2)(1) 

### in the case of aplan orplan revision SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.l.a, Codified at R307-ll0-2/EPA 

### for an area designatedas a adopts measures to attainment and approved this SIP originally in the 

### nonattainmentarea, meet the maintenance ofnational standards. early 1980's and most recently on June 

### applicable requirements of partD SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.l.b: 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### (relating to nonattainmentareas); Construction permits ofPart D §110(a)(2)(J) 

### meet the applicable requirements of -'SIPSection I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.2: Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA (§ 121 

### section 121 (relating to consultation), adopts requirements for transportation approved this SIP originally in the consultation)



### ... consultation(Section -174, Clean Air Act) early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744.

Codified at R307-110-7/ EPA -SIP Section VI 

### (Intergovernmental approved this SIP originally in the 

### Cooperation), provides a brieflisting of early 1980's and most recently on June federal, state, and local agencies involved in 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. protecting air quality in Utah. Codified at R307-110-20/ EPA approved SIP Section XII 

### Involvement, but it has been -SIP Section XII 

### (Tran.\portation superseded by SIP Section XII 

### Conformity Consultation), establishes the 

### Transportation Conf'ormity consultation procedures on transportation 

### Consultation, which was submitted to conformity issues when preparing state EPA on June 26, 2007, but EPA has plans. not approved this SIP.

§110(a)(2)(J) 

### meet the applicable requirements of SIP Section XVI 

### (Public**Not~fication)** Codified at R307-110-24/ EPA (Section 127 public 

### section 127ofthistitle (relating to adopts the requirrnents to notify the public approved this SIP originally in the notification) 

### public**not~cation)** when NAAQS have been exceeded as per early 1980's and most recently on June section 127. 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744.

Page 6 of9, C:\DOCUME-l\COURTN-1\LOCALS-l\Temp\XPgrpwise\R8 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc§110(a)(2)(J) 

### meet the applicable requirements of

... -SIP Section VIII 

### (PSD) describes the -Codified at R307-110-9/EPA 

### (PSD) part C (relating to

### prevention of program to prevent significant deterioration approved SIP Section VIII 

### PSD, but it**sign~ficant** 

### deterioration of airquality ofareas ofthe state where the air is clean. has been updated and superseded by a 

### andvisibilityprotection); new SIP Section VIII 

### PSD, which was submitted to EPA on September 15, 2006.

-SIP Section XVII 

### (Visibility Protection) -Codified at R307-110-25/EPA describes the program to protect visibility, approved this SIP in April 1997 and especially within the boundaries ofthe five most recently on June 25, 2003 at 68 national parks located in Utah. (Sections FR 37744. 19-2-101 and 104, UCA)

§110(a)(2)(K) 

### providefor: SIP Section II 

### (Review of New and**Mod~fied** CodifiedatR307-110-3/ EPA (i) 

### theperformance of such air AirPollution Sources), provides for new or approved this SIP originally in the 

### quality modeling as theAdministrator modified sources of air pollution must early 1980's and most recently on June 

### mayprescribe for thepurpose of submit plans to the Division ofAir Quality 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### predicting the effect on ambient air and receive an Approval Order before 

### quality of any emissions of any air operating. (Section 19-2-104, UCA) 

### pollutant for which theAdministrator has establisheda national ambient air quality standard, and

(ii) the submission, upon request, of data relatedto such airquality modeling to theAdministrator;

Page 7 of9, C:\DOCUME-l\COURTN-l\LOCALS-l\Temp\XPgrpwise\R8 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc§110(a)(2)(L) 

### require the owneroroperatorof each SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.1.h: Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### majorstationary source to

### pay to the authorizes a fee to major sources to cover approved this SIP originally in the 

### permitting authority, as a condition of permit and enforcement expenses. early 1980's and most recently on June 

### anypermit required underthisAct, a 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. 

### fee sufficient to cover- (i) 

### the reasonable costs ofreviewing andacting upon any applicationfor such apermit, and

(ii) 

### ifthe owneroroperator receives

apermit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms andconditions of any suchpermit (not including any court costs orothercosts associated with any enforcement action), until suchfee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator'sapproval of a

fee prof.?ram under title V; §110(a)(2)(M) 

### provide for consultation and SIP Section VI 

### (Intergovernmental Codified at R307-110-7/ EPA 

### participation by localpolitical Cooperation) lists federal, state, and local approved this SIP originally in the 

### subdivisions affectedby theplan. agencies involved in protecting airquality early 1980's and most recently on June in Utah. 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744.

SIP Section XII 

### (Transportation Codified at R307-110-20/ EPA 

### Conformity Consultation) establishes the approved SIP Section XII consultation procedures on transportation 

### Involvement, but it has been conformity issues when preparing state superseded by SIP Section XII plans. 

### Transportation Conformity

Page 8 of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\XPgrpwise\RS 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc

### Consultation, which was submitted to EPA on June 26, 2007, but EPA has not approved this SIP. §§110(a)(2)(C) 

### & Part C Permit program: 10(a)(2)(J) 

### §110(a)(2)(J) meet the applicable

- SIP Section I 

### (LegalAuthority).A.1.d.: -Codified at R307-110-2/ EPA 

### requirements of

...part C (relating to provides authority to prevent construction, approved this SIP originally in the 

### prevention of significantdeterioration modification or operation ofany stationary early 1980's and most recently on June 

### of airquality andvisibilityprotection); source at any location where emissions 25, 2003 at 68 FR 37744. from such source will prevent the 

### §JJO(a)(2)(C)

... regulation ofthe attainment ormaintenance ofa national 

### modification andconstruction of any standard orinterfere with prevention of 

### stationary source within the areas significant deterioration requirements. -Codified at R307-110-9/ EPA 

### coveredby theplan as necessary to (Authority Utah Code Section 19-2-108) approved SIP Section VIII 

### PSD, but it 

### assure that nationalambientair has been updated and superseded by a 

### quality standards are achieved, new SIP Section VIII 

### PSD, which was 

### including apemzitprogram as submitted to EPA on September 15, 

### required in parts C andD; 2006.


### 40 CFR 51.166: AmendPSD - SIP Section VIII (PSD), describes the 

### regulations as requiredby the program to prevent significant deterioration -Codified at R307-ll0-25/EPA 

### November 29, 2005.final rule (70 FR ofareas ofthe state where the air is clean. approved this SIP in April 1997 and 

### 71612 at 71699-71700). See also 70 most recently on June 25, 2003 at 68 

### FR 71671-71684. FR 37744.

-SIP Section XVII 

### (Visibility Protection) describes the program to protect visibility, especially within the boundaries ofthe five national parks located in Utah. (Sections 19-2-101 and 104, UCA)

Page 9 of9, C:\DOCUME-1\COURTN-1\LOCALS-1\Temp\XPgrpwise\RS 110 CriteriaTable for PM25.doc